Mass-Produced Housing—A Paradox?
The concept of industrializing the home construction industry is not new. The efficiencies inherent with mass-production offer enormous promise for reducing housing costs—and have been implemented by home manufacturers in many ways since the early 1900s. The great architect and founder of the Bauhaus, Walter Gropius, called for the industrialization of housing as far back as 1910. Notably, this was before Henry Ford's perfection of the assembly line in 1913. While throughout the early part of the 20th century, many leading architects and businessmen attempted to bring high-quality, modem, and affordable dwellings to the masses through innovation in a new industrial age—most had little-to-no effect on accepted home building methodology or practice. A few history-making examples are Walter Gropius and Adolf Meyers' Building Blocks standardized housing system of 1923, R. Buckminster Fuller's Dymaxion House of 1927, Konrad Wachsmann and Walter Gropius' Prefabricated Building system for General Panel Corporation, 1942, and the Lustron Corporation's 2,498 porcelain enameled steel houses dating from 1948 to 1950.
Each of the above examples brought ingenuity and technology appropriate to mass-production at some level, yet each failed to take a lasting hold on the housing industry.
In recent years, the term mass-customization has entered the lexicon of architects concerned with industrializing (more-or-less) housing. Today, state-of-the-art industrialized housing strategies are wood-frame-based operations. These are modular, factory-assembled houses that rely on a factory controlled environment and other factory efficiencies to provide cost savings.
Industrialization has yet been achieved—however, variation in design, as a favorable quality of any dwelling has been recognized throughout the industry. Sameness in appearance or layout is not valued by consumers when housing is concerned. Because a house is an expression of the homeowner's individuality, uniqueness in design is favored over sameness—and so introduces a paradox for mass-produced housing: mass-production favors sameness in design, while home buyers desire uniqueness. To this date, a housing strategy that combines the cost-saving efficiencies of mass-production with the flexibility in design demanded by consumers has yet been realized. The Loq·kit component system aims to be the first—thereby, being the first truly viable strategy for mass-producing homes.
To this end, the Loq·kit component system will offer many advantages and features that are currently unavailable within the housing industry. Of these advantages, affordability is the system's foremost goal. In order to achieve this goal, the Loq·kit building components will be reviving an abandoned methodology once at use within the home building industry. This lost paradigm is that of assembly. At this point, it is important to make this distinction: this invention is not a “pre-fab” or prefabricated housing solution, nor is it a “modular” housing solution. Each of which are wood-based technologies rooted in construction—yet are popular “affordable” home-building technologies employed today.
To illustrate the concept of assembly, the Lustron Corporation and its brief history is introduced in the following paragraph. The company's methodology for producing house components can effectively illustrate the paradigm of Assembly and help exemplify Loq·kit technology.
The Lustron Corporation was founded in 1946, and implemented our nation's most successful attempt at bringing the housing strategy of assembly to the mass-market before closing its doors in 1950. In a few short years the company produced and assembled 2,498 steel-framed houses. Following World War II, the Lustron Corporation sought to tackle the nation's housing shortage problem by mass-producing houses. Similar to the manner in which automobiles or airplanes where built in factories during the war, Lustron produced building components that could be assembled easily into several home models. Just as in other industries of mass-production, the building components were produced in the final form needed for the correct assembly of the product. Components needed no further modification after production. In this way, building components would be mass-produced, and houses were erected quickly and efficiently, whether on-site or in a factory. This one-time production of components characterizes the paradigm of assembly that underlies the development of Loq·kit's component system.
In contrast, the current home building industry remains rooted in the paradigm of construction. Historically, houses have been built by craftspeople. Their process is one of modifying building materials in raw form in order to fit into a desired assembly. This work is performed by a skilled laborer (carpenter) and is time consuming, if not expensive. The process of modifying, or customizing, a building material that has already been produced is a second fabrication of the component. Wood-based home construction technologies are rampant with this double fabrication. A doubling up of component fabrication occurs each time a wood stud or sheet of plywood (already produced in a final form) is modified from its original dimensions. Current cost-saving home building strategies such as “pre-fab” or “modular” housing utilize this technology—although performed in a factory. Consequently, construction technologies forfeit the efficiencies of true mass-production.
Construction however, is an art able to produce uniqueness in design, while assembly tends to produce sameness (the Lustron Corporation offered only three distinct mass-produced home models). As stated earlier, our homes are an expression of our own individuality as well as our shelter, and uniqueness in design is valued greatly by homeowners. This may be the single greatest reason that a successful assembly-based strategy has not made significant impact on the home building industry to date.
Loq·kit's building component system in contrast, capitalizes on the efficiencies and cost-savings of assembly (through mass-component-production) and also allows uniqueness in design, as components can be arranged into many configurations. The Loq·kit building components will introduce a mass-produced system of house parts that may be assembled into a vastly unprecedented number of desired interior layouts and exterior designs—with each design being a unique arrangement of parts selected by the homeowner. Furthermore, Loq·kit's house components will be easily installed, and interchangeable between houses. They will allow arrangement into a near infinite number of final configurations and can be reused again and again. They will incorporate new technology, such as solar power generation, and can be shipped to a world market. Loq·kit's component system is unlike any home building technology currently in use—and is vastly different from technologies of the past.
So What?—The Power of the Prototype
A successful industrialized housing strategy would have enormous potential for influencing change within the housing industry. Such a strategy would introduce a workable prototype—a building methodology suitable for evolution through years of refinement. The Loq·kit Component System was developed according to the belief that a successful industrialized housing strategy (the prototype) is not the creation of a single building, but the creation of a system for producing housing individuality at an affordable price. It is anticipated, that a system such as this, would fill a need in the housing market where there is currently not a product offered. High-quality, unique, and affordable houses—that incorporate new technology (and are a product of new technology as well)—could flourish, giving new meaning to the low end of the housing market. With a successful industrialized housing strategy representing a large portion of new single-family housing starts nationwide, or worldwide, it would take on the power to dictate standardization of product to manufacturers who wish to compete in the new arena. This is the prototype's hidden power. Private industry invests very little effort in realizing creative and affordable home options for consumers because the marketplace is largely unestablished. By opening up the market with a successful industrialized housing prototype, it would be revealed to private industry that money could be made through participation. Unrelated product manufacturers would find incentive for standardization according to the dictates of the new industry. A successful prototype for housing could unify currently unrelated interests within the industry toward a common goal and achieve housing affordability and flexibility, and make a profit as well.